The value of systemically administered metronidazole in the modified Widman flap procedure

Influence of periodontal surgery on the subgingival microbiome-A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of periodontal surgery on the subgingival microbiome.

BACKGROUND

Periodontitis is a chronic inflammation of the tooth supporting tissues caused by the dysbiosis of the subgingival biofilm. It is managed through different non-surgical and surgical treatment modalities. Recent EFP S3 guidelines recommended performing periodontal surgery as part of Step 3 periodontitis treatment after Step 1 and Step 2 periodontal therapy, with the aim to achieve pocket closure of persisting sites. Changes in the sub-gingival microbiome may explain the treatment outcomes observed at different time points. Various microbiological detection techniques for disease-associated pathogens have been evolved over time and have been described in the literature. However, the impact of different types of periodontal surgery on the subgingival microbiome remains unclear.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase, LILACS and Cochrane Library supplemented by manual search (23DEC2019, updated 21APR2022).

RESULTS

From an initial search of 3046 studies, 28 were included according to our specific inclusion criteria. Seven microbiological detection techniques were used to analyse disease-associated species in subgingival plaque samples: optical microscope, culture, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), checkerboard, enzymatic reactions, immunofluorescence and 16S gene sequencing. The included studies exhibited differences in various aspects of their methodologies such as subgingival plaque sample collection or treatment modalities. Clinical data showed a significant decrease in probing pocket depths (PPD) and clinical attachment loss (CAL) after periodontal surgery. Microbiological findings were overall heterogeneous. Meta-analysis was performed on a sub-cohort of studies all using checkerboard as a microbiological detection technique. Random effect models for Treponema denticola (T. denticola), Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and Tannerella forsythia (T. forsythia) did not show a significant effect on mean counts 3 months after periodontal surgery. Notably, Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans (A. actinomycetemcomitans) showed a significant increase 3 months after periodontal surgery. 16S gene sequencing was used in one included study and reported a decrease in disease-associated species with an increase in health-associated species after periodontal surgery at 3 and 6 months.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has shown that the effect of periodontal surgery on the changes in subgingival microbiome is heterogeneous and may not always be associated with a decrease in disease-associated species. The variability could be attributed to the microbiological techniques employed for the analysis. Therefore, there is a need for well-designed and adequately powered studies to understand how periodontal surgery influences the subgingival microbiome and how the individual's microbiome affects treatment outcomes after periodontal surgery.

Adjunctive efficacy of systemic metronidazole in the surgical treatment of periodontitis: a double-blind parallel randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and microbiological impact of adjunctive metronidazole to periodontal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systemically healthy patients, with stages III-IV, grades B-C periodontitis, were randomly assigned to receive metronidazole or placebo adjunctive to periodontal surgery, after subgingival instrumentation. Clinical variables were recorded at the initial visit, 6 weeks after subgingival instrumentation, and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Microbiological samples were taken at initial and final visits and analyzed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS

Our results showed no statistically significant differences in the reduction of probing depth between the initial and final (1 year) visits in the two treatment groups. Additionally, no statistically significant differences were observed between study groups when comparing the post-subgingival instrumentation and final visits. However, 3 months after surgery, probing depth (mean difference, MD = 0.31 mm, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.13; 0.49]; p = 0.001) and clinical attachment level (MD = 0.64 mm, 95% CI [0.02; 1.27]; p = 0.044) were significantly lower in the test group.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjunctive use of systemic metronidazole to periodontal surgery has a limited clinical and microbiological impact in the present study, and therefore, its use is not recommended.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

There are no studies that have evaluated the clinical and microbiological impact of the adjunctive use of systemic metronidazole to periodontal surgery (step 3 of periodontal therapy). The results of the present study do not support the adjunctive use of systemic metronidazole to periodontal surgery.

A review of the literature: antibiotic usage and its relevance to the infection in periodontal flaps

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the systemic antibiotic usage in the perioperative period of periodontal flaps and its relevance to the infection after surgeries through reviewing the papers of the last decade.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search was conducted for the studies of randomized clinical trials between 2005 and 2014 that reported periodontal flaps in chronic periodontitis patients. Data were extracted and the rate of the systemic antibiotic use, the infection rate after surgeries and the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one infected case were calculated. The impact of antibiotic use and materials used in surgeries on the infection was evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-three trials were included. Antibiotics were used in 73.7% of the patients and 75.4% of the flaps. Infection occurred in only five flaps where enamel matrix proteins (EMD) or EMD + bone grafts were used in intrabony defects. Only 0.170% of the surgeries got infected in total. When all kinds of surgeries were included for analysis, the infection rate was 0.073% for the surgeries using antibiotics, which was lower than the infection rate 0.693% for the surgeries not using antibiotics (p < .05). The infection rate was very low in general. NNT was 203 when all the surgeries were included for analysis. Therefore, the difference of the infection rates between using antibiotics and not might lack clinical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the very low incidence of the infection and the disadvantages of the systemic antibiotic use, we suggest not using systemic antibiotics in the perioperative period of periodontal flaps to prevent infection.

Evaluation of the role of antibiotics in preventing postoperative complication after routine periodontal surgery: A comparative clinical study

Background and Objectives:

Aim of this randomly controlled clinical study was to evaluate the role of antibiotics to prevent postoperative complications after routine periodontal surgery and also to determine whether their administration improved the surgical outcome.

Materials and Methods:

Forty-five systemically healthy patients with moderate to severe chronic periodontitis requiring flap surgery were enrolled in the study. They were randomly allocated to Amoxicillin, Doxycycline, and control groups. Surgical procedures were carried out with complete asepsis as per the protocol. Postoperative assessment of patient variables like swelling, pain, temperature, infection, ulceration, necrosis, and trismus was performed at intervals of 24 h, 48 h, 1 week, and 3 months. Changes in clinical parameters such as gingival index, plaque index, probing pocket depth, and clinical attachment level were also recorded.

Results:

There was no incidence of postoperative infection in any of the patients. Patient variables were comparable in all the three groups. Though there was significant improvement in the periodontal parameters in all the groups, no statistically significant result was observed for any group over the others.

Conclusion:

Results of this study showed that when periodontal surgical procedures were performed following strict asepsis, the incidence of clinical infection was not significant among all the three groups, and also that antibiotic administration did not influence the outcome of surgery. Therefore, prophylactic antibiotics for patients who are otherwise healthy administered following routine periodontal surgery to prevent postoperative infection are unnecessary and have no demonstrable additional benefits.

Antimicrobial therapy in periodontitis: the use of systemic antimicrobials against the subgingival biofilm

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to answer three relevant questions: can systemic antimicrobials be efficacious if the biofilm is not disrupted? Can the type of debridement of the subgingival biofilm impact upon the clinical outcomes of the adjunctive antimicrobial therapy? Is the efficacy of the adjunctive systemic antimicrobial therapy dependent on the quality of the debridement of the subgingival biofilm and the sequence debridement-antibiotic usage?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Relevant papers were searched, critically analysed and their data were extracted.

RESULTS

For the first question, studies assessing susceptibility of bacteria in biofilms, and clinical studies evaluating systemic antimicrobials as monotherapy, were reviewed. For the second question, clinical studies comparing systemic antimicrobials as adjuncts to non-surgical debridement or to periodontal surgery and clinical trials using systemic antibiotics with periodontal surgery were evaluated. For the third question, a previous systematic review was updated.

CONCLUSION

If systemic antimicrobials are indicated in periodontal therapy, they should be adjunctive to mechanical debridement. There is not enough evidence to support their use with periodontal surgery. Indirect evidence suggests that antibiotic intake should start on the day of debridement completion, debridement should be completed within a short time (preferably <1 week) and with an adequate quality, to optimize the results.

Systemic anti-infective periodontal therapy. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Periodontal diseases are infections and thus systemically administered antibiotics are often employed as adjuncts for their control. There are conflicting reports as to whether these agents provide a therapeutic benefit.

RATIONALE

The purpose of this systematic review is to determine whether systemically administered antibiotics improve a primary clinical outcome measure, periodontal attachment level change.

FOCUSED QUESTION

In patients with periodontitis, what is the effect of systemically administered antibiotics as compared to controls on clinical measures of attachment level?

SEARCH PROTOCOL

The Pub/Med database was searched from 1966 to May 2002. Searches were limited to human studies published in English. Hand searches were performed on the Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Periodontology, and Journal of Periodontal Research. References in relevant papers and review articles were also examined.

SELECTION CRITERIA

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: randomized controlled clinical trials, quasi-experimental studies, and cohort studies of > 1 month duration with a comparison group; subjects with aggressive, chronic, or recurrent periodontitis and periodontal abscess; use of a single or a combination of systemically administered antibiotics(s) versus non-antibiotic therapy; and a primary outcome of mean attachment level change (AL).

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

Studies involving the use of low-dose doxycycline, combinations of locally plus systemic antibiotics, or where the control group included a systemically administered antibiotic were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A mean difference in AL between groups was available for all papers used in the meta-analysis. A standard deviation (SD) for the difference was used if provided or calculated from the SD or standard error of the mean (SEM) when provided for single measurements. Data were subset by antibiotic employed, type of adjunctive therapy, and disease type. Results were assessed with both fixed-effects and random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

1. Twenty-nine studies, 26 RCTs and 3 quasi-experimental (36 comparisons), met the entry criteria. Total study population, both control and test groups, was estimated at over 1,200. 2. Twenty-two studies (27 comparisons) were used in the meta-analysis, evaluating if the antibiotics provided a consistent benefit in mean AL change for different patient populations, for different therapies, and for different antibiotics. 3. For the majority of the comparisons, systemically administered antibiotics exhibited a more positive attachment level change than the control group in the study. The combined results were statistically significant (P < 0.001). 4. The systemic antibiotics were uniformly beneficial in providing an improvement in AL when used as adjuncts to scaling and root planing (SRP) and were consistently beneficial, although of borderline significance, when used as adjuncts to SRP plus surgery or as a stand alone therapy. 5. When examining the effects of individual or combinations of antibiotics, it was found that there were statistically significant improvements in AL for tetracycline, metronidazole, and an effect of borderline statistical significance for the combination of amoxicillin plus metronidazole. 6. Improvements in mean AL were consistent for both chronic and aggressive periodontitis subjects, although the aggressive periodontitis patients benefited more from the antibiotics.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

1. The use of systemically administered adjunctive antibiotics with and without SRP and/or surgery appeared to provide a greater clinical improvement in AL than therapies not employing these agents. 2. The data supported similar effect sizes for the majority of the antibiotics; therefore, the selection for an individual patient has to be made based on other factors. 3. Due to a lack of sufficient sample size for many of the antibiotics tested, it is difficult to provide guidance as to the more effective ones.

Topical and systemic antibiotics in the management of periodontal diseases

Both systemic and topical antibiotics are increasingly used in the management of periodontal infections. Whilst these drugs are used mostly on an empirical basis, some contend that rational use of antibiotics should be the norm due to their wide abuse and consequential global emergence of antibiotic resistance organisms. Here we review the rationale and principles of antimicrobial therapy, treatment goals, drug delivery routes and various antibiotics that are used in the management of periodontal diseases. The pros and cons of systemic and local antibiotic therapy are described together with practical guidelines for their delivery. The available data indicate, in general, that mechanical periodontal treatment alone is adequate to ameliorate or resolve the clinical condition in most cases, but adjunctive antimicrobial agents, delivered either locally or systemically, can enhance the effect of therapy in specific situations. This is particularly true for aggressive (early onset) periodontitis, in patients with generalised systemic disease that may affect host resistance and in case of poor response to conventional mechanical therapy. Locally delivered antibiotics together with mechanical debridement are indicated for non-responding sites of focal infection or in localised recurrent disease. After resolution of the periodontal infection, the patient should be placed on an individually tailored maintenance care programme. Optimal plaque control by the patient is of paramount importance for a favourable clinical and microbiological response to any form of periodontal therapy.

A systematic review on the effect of systemic antimicrobials as an adjunct to scaling and root planing in periodontitis patients

BACKGROUND

Scaling and root planing (SRP) are the bases of non-surgical therapy in the treatment of periodontitis. However, results from this therapy are often unpredictable and dependable from many different factors.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of the adjunctive use of systemic antimicrobials with scaling and root planing (SRP) vs. SRP alone in the treatment of chronic (CP) or aggressive periodontitis (AgP).

SEARCH STRATEGY

Use of computerized databases, namely MEDLINE, the Cochrane Oral Health Group Specialty Trials Register and EMBASE; reference lists from relevant articles were hand-searched; and a hand-search of selected journals until April 2001.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were selected if they were designed as controlled clinical trials in which systemically healthy patients with either AgP or CP were treated with SRP plus systemic antimicrobials in comparison with SRP alone or with placebo, for a minimum of 6 months. Main outcome measures were clinical attachment level (CAL) change and probing pocket depth (PPD) change.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted independently information regarding quality and study characteristics, in duplicate. Kappa scores determined their agreement. Main results were collected and grouped by drug, disease and PPD category. For the quantitative data synthesis, the data was pooled (when mean differences and standard errors were available), and either a Fixed Effects or Random Effects meta-analysis was used for the analysis.

RESULTS

After an initial selection, 158 papers were identified by the manual and electronic searches; 25 papers were eligible for inclusion. Their quality assessment showed that randomization and allocation concealment methods were seldom reported and blindness was usually not defined clearly. In general, selected studies showed high variability and lack of relevant information for an adequate assessment. Overall, SRP plus systemic antimicrobial groups demonstrated better results in CAL and PPD change than SRP alone or with placebo groups. Only limited meta-analyses could be performed, due to the difficulties in pooling the studies and the lack of appropriate data. This analysis showed a statistically significant additional benefit for spiramycin (PPD change) and amoxicillin/metronidazole (CAL change) in deep pockets.

CONCLUSION

Systemic antimicrobials in conjunction with SRP, can offer an additional benefit over SRP alone in the treatment of periodontitis, in terms of CAL and PPD change, and reduced risk of additional CAL loss. However, differences in study methodology and lack of data precluded an adequate and complete pooling of data for a more comprehensive analyses. It was difficult to establish definitive conclusions, although patients with deep pockets, progressive or 'active' disease, or specific microbiological profile, can benefit more from this adjunctive therapy.

Change of antibiotic susceptibility following periodontal therapy. A pilot study in aggressive periodontal disease

BACKGROUND

The hypothesis was tested that bacterial susceptibilities in aggressive periodontitis change upon administration of systemic antibiotics as adjuncts to periodontal therapy.

METHODS

In 23 subjects (average age 38.9+/-6.7 years) with aggressive periodontitis, microbial parameters were assessed prior to and 1 year after completion of comprehensive mechanical/surgical and systemic antimicrobial therapy. Following identification of five selected pathogens with the Rapid ID 32 A system, their susceptibilities towards amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium, metronidazole, and tetracycline were examined with the E-test. Antibiotics were administered according to the test results, and the minimal inhibitory concentrations (MIC90) were reevaluated after 1 year. Statistical analysis was performed on a patient basis, with the site data used for evaluation of the MIC levels.

RESULTS

Bacterial MIC levels remained constant among the three antibiotic treatment groups compared with baseline. Mean MIC90 values ranged from <0.02 to 0.11 microg/ml (amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium), <0.02 to 0.27 microg/ml (metronidazole), and <0.02 to 0.11 microg/ml (tetracycline). Observed changes in susceptibility were attributed to the elimination of single bacterial taxa in the subgingival environment after antibiotic therapy. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical parameters among the treatment groups. Single tetracycline MICs were 1.5- to 6-fold enhanced compared to amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium and metronidazole.

CONCLUSION

The periodontal pathogens investigated prior to and 1 year after periodontal therapy are tested sensitive to the antimicrobial agents. In aggressive periodontitis, changes in bacterial susceptibility upon the administration of systemic antibiotics are associated with the limited number of isolates tested following therapy.

The antimicrobial treatment of periodontal disease: changing the treatment paradigm

Over the last 100 years, methods of surgical periodontal treatment have enjoyed a history of success in improving oral health. The paradigm of care is based on the "non-specific plaque hypothesis"--that is, the overgrowth of bacterial plaques cause periodontal disease, and the suppression of this overgrowth reduces disease risk. The central feature of this approach to care is the removal of inflamed gingival tissue around the teeth to reduce periodontal pocket depth, thereby facilitating plaque removal by the dentist and by the patient at home. Over the last 30 years, with the recognition that periodontal disease(s) is caused by specific bacteria and that specific antimicrobial agents can reduce or eliminate the infection, a second paradigm has developed. This new paradigm, the "specific plaque hypothesis", focuses on reducing the specific bacteria that cause periodontal attachment loss. The contrast between the two paradigms can be succinctly stated as follows: The antimicrobial therapy reduces the cause, while the surgical therapy reduces the result of the periodontal infection. The specific plaque hypothesis has two important implications. First, with the increasing attention to evidence-based models for prevention, treatment, outcome assessment, and reimbursement of care, increasing attention and financial effort will be channeled into effective preventive and treatment methods. Second, the recent observations that periodontal infections increase the risk of specific systemic health problems, such as cardiovascular disease, argue for the prevention and elimination of these periodontal infections. This review highlights some of the evidence for the specific plaque hypothesis, and the questions that should be addressed if antimicrobial agents are to be used responsively and effectively.

Clinical safety of enamel matrix derivative (EMDOGAIN) in the treatment of periodontal defects

The aim of the present clinical trial was to test tolerability during 2 treatments with EMDOGAIN in a large number of patients. An open, controlled study design in 10 Swedish specialist clinics was chosen, with a test group of 107 patients treated with EMDOGAIN in connection with periodontal surgery at 2 surgical test sites per patient. The procedures were performed 2 to 6 weeks apart on one-rooted teeth with at least 4 mm deep intraosseous lesions. A control group of 33 patients underwent flap surgery without EMDOGAIN at 1 comparable site. In total, 214 test and 33 control surgeries were performed. Serum samples were obtained from test patients for analysis of total and specific antibody levels. 10 of the patients had samples taken before and after the first surgery, 56 other samples were taken after one treatment with EMDOGAIN, and 63 after 2 treatments. None of the samples, not even from allergy-prone patients after 2 treatments, indicated deviations from established baseline ranges. This indicates that the immunogenic potential of EMDOGAIN is extremely low when applied in conjunction with periodontal surgery. Comparison between the test and control groups demonstrated the same type and frequency of postsurgical experiences, i.e., reactions caused by the surgical procedure itself. Clinical probing and radiographic evaluation was performed at baseline and 8 months postsurgery. About half of the patients (44 test and 21 control) were also evaluated after 3 years. There was a significant difference between the test and control results at 8 months postsurgery, and this difference had increased further at the 3 year follow-up. The 2.5-3 mm increase in attachment and bone level after treatment with EMDOGAIN was of the same magnitude as seen in the studies with split-mouth design aiming for test of effectiveness of EMDOGAIN.

Meta-analysis of the effect of systemic metronidazole as an adjunct to scaling and root planing for adult periodontitis

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to provide a quantitative overview of clinical trials assessing the use of systemic metronidazole (S-MET) as an adjunct to scaling and root planning (S&RP) in the treatment of adult periodontitis. Eight clinical trials were chosen based upon a priori selection criteria, and two outcomes, "reduction in probing pocket depth" (PD) and "gain in clinical attachment level" (CAL), were analyzed. Results for each outcome were stratified by initial PD 1-3 mm, 4-6 mm, or > or = 7 mm and length of follow-up 4-6 wk, 9-13 wk, or 14-26 wk. S-MET in conjunction with S&RP was superior to S&RP alone in reducing PD where initial PD was 4-6 mm and follow-up was 9-13 wk (0.43 mm; 99% CI 0.12, 0.73). No significant advantage was observed for S-MET for reducing PD where initial PD was less than 4 mm or follow-up was longer than 13 wk. S-MET in conjunction with S&RP was superior to S&RP alone in reducing CAL where initial PD was 4-6 mm and follow-up was 4-6 wk (0.29; 99% CI 0.01, 0.58) and where follow-up was 9-13 wk (weighted mean difference 0.32; 99% CI 0.03, 0.61). Significant heterogeneity of effect was not seen for PD or Cal at any level of initial PD or length of follow-up. No significant dose-response relationship was observed. This meta-analysis was limited due to diversity of data presentation and the small number of trials in each stratum. These results suggest that S-MET in conjunction with S&RP may offer a benefit over S&RP alone in the treatment of adult periodontitis patients in managing pockets of 4 mm or greater, but the additional benefit was not evident if initial PD was less than 4 mm or follow-up was beyond 13 wk.

Microbiology in the management of destructive periodontal disease

This paper summarizes the rationale for the application of microbiology in the management of destructive periodontal diseases. The subgingival microbiota in patients with severe periodontitis is complex and contains high numbers of obligate anaerobic bacteria as well as facultative micro-organisms. It has become clear that major differences exist in the composition of the subgingival microflora. These differences are not only quantitative but also qualitative. Difference in plaque composition is the basis for the application of clinical microbiology in the management of periodontal disease. Several bacterial species have emerged as useful indicators for progressive periodontitis. In this respect, the importance of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans, Bacteroides gingivalis and Bacteroides intermedius has been shown in a number of studies. It has become clear that A. actinomycetemcomitans is not specifically associated with the local form of juvenile periodontitis, but this micro-organism is probably also of importance in severe periodontitis in adult patients. Selection of individuals with an A. actinomycetemcomitans associated periodontitis is essential since successful treatment in these patients needs an adjunctive antibiotic therapy. Microbiological testing can be useful in patients showing a poor response to periodontal treatment (refractory periodontitis). Factors which may be responsible include poor oral hygiene, poor subgingival debridement, the patient's susceptibility and a subgingival microflora resistant to therapy. In this patient category, microbiological testing is capable of diverting continuing periodontal treatment. Furthermore, microbiology can be useful in evaluating periodontal treatment. Successful elimination of specific periodontopathic microorganisms can be used to determine recall intervals.

Antibiotics in periodontal therapy: advantages and disadvantages

Antibiotic treatment of periodontitis aims at eradicating or controlling specific pathogens. Prime candidates for antibiotic therapy are patients with recently diagnosed active periodontitis or a history of recurrent disease who fail to stabilize following mechanical/surgical therapy. Since a variety of microbes with differing antimicrobial susceptibility profiles may cause periodontitis, selection of antimicrobial agents should be based on proper microbial diagnosis and sensitivity testing, as well as consideration of the patient's medical status. The risk of treating chemotherapeutically solely on the basis of clinical features, radiographic findings or a limited microbiological analysis, is failure to control the pathogens or overgrowth of new pathogens. A review of published papers reveals that appropriate systemic antibiotic therapy may enhance healing in patients with recent or high risk of periodontal breakdown. Systemic antibiotic therapy seems more predictable than topical administration in eradicating periodontal pathogens from deep periodontal pockets. Several promising antimicrobial agents for periodontitis treatment need testing in placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized clinical trials.

The use of antimicrobial acrylic strips in the nonsurgical management of chronic periodontitis

Evidence to date has demonstrated the potential value of acrylic strips to deliver antimicrobial compounds into periodontal pockets. The present study was designed to evaluate further the therapeutic effect of antimicrobial acrylic strips in the management of chronic periodontitis. A total of 101 pockets in 69 patients were randomly treated with (1) chlorhexidine strips, (2) metronidazole strips, (3) tetracycline strips, (4) root planing, and (5) combined root planing and metronidazole strips. Immediately before and after treatment clinical measurements of disease were recorded over a three-month period. For all treatment groups significant improvements in clinical parameters were seen compared to control untreated sites but the most effective treatment was combined root planing and metronidazole and the least effective chlorhexidine. Although not significant, combined root planing and metronidazole also appeared to produce some adjunctive effects on clinical parameters compared to root planing alone. Antimicrobial acrylic strips appear useful treatments for chronic periodontitis, but should be used primarily as an adjunct to conventional root planing.

Treatment of recurrent periodontal disease by root planing and Ornidazole (Tiberal). Clinical and microbiological findings

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of Ornidazole as an adjunct to root planing in the therapy of patients suffering from recurrent periodontal disease. In 10 individuals who had previously been treated with scaling, root planing and periodontal surgery and who had followed a regular maintenance program including recall visits every 3-5 months for 1-7 years, 2 sites with recurrent periodontitis and 1 shallow site were selected. Reinfected sites had a record of losing clinical attachment of more than 3 mm since the completion of initial therapy, were bleeding upon probing and had a mean pocket probing depth of 7.85 +/- 1.31 mm. They had been reinstrumented several times by a registered dental hygienist, when clinical signs of recurrence of disease had appeared and the root surfaces were judged to be smooth and free of deposits. Clinical parameters were recorded and microbial samples were collected twice prior to retreatment. Then, 500 mg Ornidazole, to be taken twice a day for 10 days, was administered, and the whole dentition was thoroughly scaled and root planed. At day 10 as well as 2, 5, 8 and 11 months thereafter, samples were again obtained. At baseline, reinfected sites showed over 20% spirochetes, over 20% motile rods and over 9% fusiform organisms in darkfield preparations of subgingival plaque samples. Culturally, over 1/10 of organisms were identified as black pigmenting Bacteroides and in 18% of all baseline samples collected, B. gingivalis was found.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)